How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Taranis]

@Haiduk Do you have any information about the composition of the "100,000" Russian soldiers who would launch a counter-attack in the north? In Karmazynivska area.

It seems 3rd MRD is in the area and probably 4th GTD in the assembly area ?

I think the composition of the force could be a good indicator of the russian objectives.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

4 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Which war game (computer or board game) would best simulated the static combat we are observing in eastern Ukraine? And would those products shed light on the war and combat so we all can learn from past mistakes? I use Combat Mission and Command, but they are obvious choices. Sure many other gamers do as well. 

Checkers

[Beleg85]

Leopard 2A6 being hit by Lancet- according to Wolski, white cloud means fire suppression systems started working, which means that explosion reached crew commpartment, later corroborated by black smoke.

Generally in last month Russians ramped up their drone warfare very visibly, both in quality and quantity. Lancet attacks are conducted deeper within UA-controlled territory and are more precise. Muscovite superiority in EW warfare also started to kick in, according to several military observers here- Ukrainians lack modern jamming systems and AA sets in numbers necessary to counter it. Yesterday new videos of UA SP artillery being destroyed during ammo loading and additional tanks also surfaced.

 

[cesmonkey]

6 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Ok, I agree the nuke stuff is going nowhere. Maybe we can lighten the discussion up. Which war game (computer or board game) would best simulated the static combat we are observing in eastern Ukraine? And would those products shed light on the war and combat so we all can learn from past mistakes? I use Combat Mission and Command, but they are obvious choices. Sure many other gamers do as well. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_I_video_games

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_I_board_wargames

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_War:_Western_Front

Maybe mod in some drones? Or maybe the capabilities of air balloons and aircraft of that era could stand-in?

Note: I'm only half-way joking.

[cesmonkey]

https://t.me/operativnoZSU/106951

Quote

The first photo of the 155-mm cluster projectiles, which were recently transferred to Ukraine by the USA.

Extended-range M864 projectiles (29 km), each of which contains 72 dual-purpose submunitions.

 

 

[kraze]

This is why I hate "human rights" organizations.

https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-director-general-deplores-death-journalist-rostislav-zhuravlev-ukraine

One thing that I don't quite understand is "Journalists serve a critical role in informing the world about conflict situations and must be protected."

The guy looks pretty protected to me.

Edited July 24, 2023 by kraze

[cesmonkey]

 

[Battlefront.com]

49 minutes ago, kraze said:

This is why I hate "human rights" organizations.

https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-director-general-deplores-death-journalist-rostislav-zhuravlev-ukraine

One thing that I don't quite understand is "Journalists serve a critical role in informing the world about conflict situations and must be protected."

The guy looks pretty protected to me.

Yeah, we have to use quotation marks about Russian "journalists".  They are propagandists directly employed by the state to produce material used for the state's illicit purposes.  In reality they are no more journalists than a uniformed soldier conducting PR activities.

But aside from that, the rules of war are very clear.  Journalists are not to be deliberately targeted.  If they die because they are embedded with a combat unit that was attacked as part of standard warfare, that's not illegal.

If Ukraine deliberately targeted these "journalists" then that is theoretically a war crime.  However, if there was a trial the defense would quite understandably ague that these guys weren't journalists.  I think they would be successful in their defense.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

11 hours ago, Kinophile said:

 

 

The problem with commentary like this is we still have NO evidence that Putin believes anything that he says.  Which means the conclusions made by people like this are completely speculative, which means the alleged ramifications are also suspect.

Without that evidence, one can easily look at Putin's rantings as that of a despot desperately putting together a narrative for his won people and global supporters.  Most people don't know history very well, so if they are predisposed to believe Putin they won't bother fact checking him.  It's effective messaging to already receptive audiences, it is ineffective with anybody else.

The question that should be asked is what else is Putin going to say about this war?  Since Russia's goals are genocidal in nature, there really isn't anything he can say to justify what is going on that won't sound detached from reality.  Well, except saying "we attacked Ukraine without any purpose other than to destroy its people and its lands so that Russia can forever more have it for its own purposes".

Steve

[kraze]

34 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yeah, we have to use quotation marks about Russian "journalists".  They are propagandists directly employed by the state to produce material used for the state's illicit purposes.  In reality they are no more journalists than a uniformed soldier conducting PR activities.

But aside from that, the rules of war are very clear.  Journalists are not to be deliberately targeted.  If they die because they are embedded with a combat unit that was attacked as part of standard warfare, that's not illegal.

If Ukraine deliberately targeted these "journalists" then that is theoretically a war crime.  However, if there was a trial the defense would quite understandably ague that these guys weren't journalists.  I think they would be successful in their defense.

Steve

The guy was fighting in this war since 2014. That photo isn't just him posing with an RPK.

They just give some of their more 'media-friendly' soldiers a press ID and they suddenly get to be "journalists".

 

Not even talking propaganda here.

[danfrodo]

32 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The problem with commentary like this is we still have NO evidence that Putin believes anything that he says.  Which means the conclusions made by people like this are completely speculative, which means the alleged ramifications are also suspect.

Without that evidence, one can easily look at Putin's rantings as that of a despot desperately putting together a narrative for his won people and global supporters.  Most people don't know history very well, so if they are predisposed to believe Putin they won't bother fact checking him.  It's effective messaging to already receptive audiences, it is ineffective with anybody else.

The question that should be asked is what else is Putin going to say about this war?  Since Russia's goals are genocidal in nature, there really isn't anything he can say to justify what is going on that won't sound detached from reality.  Well, except saying "we attacked Ukraine without any purpose other than to destroy its people and its lands so that Russia can forever more have it for its own purposes".

Steve

Definitely.  He just says whatever he thinks will fit the moment.  Does it matter if it's crazy?  No.  Does it matter if it contradicts what he said yesterday?  No.

A tiny little bit of good news here.  This feller says UKR making advance on the left bank toward Oleshky.  Don't think it can amount to much but it at least made me feel good.  I still have forlorn hope of UKR getting enough bridgehead to start raiding behind RU lines -- yeah, yeah, I know, very improbable.

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by danfrodo

[Beleg85]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Without that evidence, one can easily look at Putin's rantings as that of a despot desperately putting together a narrative for his won people and global supporters.  Most people don't know history very well, so if they are predisposed to believe Putin they won't bother fact checking him.  It's effective messaging to already receptive audiences, it is ineffective with anybody else.

The question that should be asked is what else is Putin going to say about this war?  Since Russia's goals are genocidal in nature, there really isn't anything he can say to justify what is going on that won't sound detached from reality.  Well, except saying "we attacked Ukraine without any purpose other than to destroy its people and its lands so that Russia can forever more have it for its own purposes".

Signals as to vision of history like this, when other countries freely take borders from others like it is some deep medieval era, were ubiquitus in Russian narratives for a long time before this war, just most of us didn't want to bother or dismissed them out of hand/sacrifized on altar of good relations with Muscovia. Putin didn't invent new history here, he just tells freely what "geopolitical" elites in his country believe for at least two decades: that Central Europe is exclusive Russian dominium and that all other players think in the same, darwinian way about borders and states. Change in his behaviour is chiefly visible in more robust wording now and overall much more emotional speeches.

Seeing imperialists everywhere around naturally also takes the axiological burder off from Russia itself. And most importantly, Putin due to inherent stress of last years probably started to personally believe in his own lies too. It's hard job to be coryphee of "new, multipolar world order" after all.

On foothnote- there were rumours some months ago that Russian diplomats for example heavily tried to woe their equivalents in Poland and Slovakia (often via Hungary) into saying something they could sell to their own public as imperialism. Even smallest lapse of thought or unfortunate wording (we all sometimes suffer) on behalf of some God-forgotten politican /diplomat/offical could surely immediatelly find its place in main Russian TV channels in prime time.

It unfortunatelly isn't limited to officials, either; I am still surprised how many Russians, even quite intelligent, literate and not at all Putin followers, believe for 100% that Poland only waits to "annex" western Ukraine or that Lithuania want to take parts of Belarus. Ofc. constant danger to Kaliningrad, ops sorry - Kralovec, is put forward almost immediatelly in these talks.

On surface this notion that "international relation are Wild West withiout guiding rules or principles" strongly resembles German last hopes in 1945 about "unavoidable" break-out between Allies. Unfortunatelly, this time feeling is much more rooted in society and a reason that this conflict will not end when guns will fell silent. Entire generation of muscovites will be contaminated by revanchism, even irrelevant of the outcome of current war. Imperialism is too strong narcotic.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Beleg85

[FancyCat]

Russia is now destroying infrastructure on the Danube, threatening significant grain transfer facilities, of which were exporting more grain than the Black Sea grain deal. 
 

Quote

Another night of terror in Odesa region.   Russia has attacked Ukrainian port infrastructure, this time on the Danube river, with strike drones. 6 people were injured, a grain hangar was destroyed, and cargo storage tanks were damaged.  via OK "Pivden".

Edited July 24, 2023 by FancyCat

[kevinkin]

The business of war: duel use equipment and what to do about it.

https://www.politico.eu/article/china-firms-russia-body-armor-bullet-proof-drones-thermal-optics-army-equipment-shanghai-h-win/

 

[_Morpheus_]

New video (part 1 from 3 ) from the 3rd Assault Brigade: counter offensive near Bakhmut.
Sorry, no subtitles 

 

[FancyCat]

Something to note, as of presently, Ukraine's anti air network is not able to cover Kiyv, the front lines, and Odessa in sufficient numbers. Russia is also using anti-ship missiles, which I believe are able to avoid more defenses. The illustration of attacks on economic infrastructure on Odessa, the Danube, showcase the risk in Russia retaining Crimea, as missiles are launched from Crimea towards Odessa.

The worst scenario for Ukraine is one where Ukraine is unable to enter NATO or end the war via retaking Crimea and Russia engages in a long distance war to economically devastate Ukraine's exports, combine it with civilian targeting, driving Ukrainians to leave the country.

Ensuring the West wins the conflict, means ensuring Ukraine has a long term plan at flourishing, which means the conditions for such flourishing must be met in some form or manner. Whether NATO entrance, or flooding of weapons and equipment or the liberation of Crimea, we must not lose sight of the ultimate goal, Ukraine must not become a economic basketcase, unable to ensure security for their people, due to Russian long range weapons.

You can destroy Russian capacity for war with NATO all you want, the nuclear risk factor means it will never come to war between NATO and Russia, and if that means the Russian ability to wage war on Ukraine remains standing, the West will be considered to have lost.

[danfrodo]

5 minutes ago, _Morpheus_ said:

New video (part 1 from 3 ) from the 3rd Assault Brigade: counter offensive near Bakhmut.
Sorry, no subtitles 

 

I'm still wondering what the cost-benefit looks like from UKR perspective for fighting around Bakhmut.  Aint much there worth taking and at this point it doesn't have much morale or propaganda value, IMO.  So I am assuming it's an operation where UKR believes it's destroying or at least fixing RU units for relatively low cost. 

Which also reminds about something else I am thinking about: if UKR is significantly reducing RU artillery then at some point UKR needs to attack in enough locations such that RU can't cover all those areas, leading to some local collapses/retreats.  But when will UKR feel like it's time to do that?

[_Morpheus_]

18 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I'm still wondering what the cost-benefit looks like from UKR perspective for fighting around Bakhmut.  Aint much there worth taking and at this point it doesn't have much morale or propaganda value, IMO.  So I am assuming it's an operation where UKR believes it's destroying or at least fixing RU units for relatively low cost. 

Which also reminds about something else I am thinking about: if UKR is significantly reducing RU artillery then at some point UKR needs to attack in enough locations such that RU can't cover all those areas, leading to some local collapses/retreats.  But when will UKR feel like it's time to do that?

IMHO: Longer russians are staying on the occupied positions, better positions they will have. Take a look how much mines/tranches russians prepare in Zaporizhia, so Bakhmut should not have so many minefields around it. Actually they were able to attack on the 3 km long front and push for 2 km, it would be really hard to do in Zaporizhia for example.

Edited July 24, 2023 by _Morpheus_

[kevinkin]

3 hours ago, danfrodo said:

UKR needs to attack in enough locations such that RU can't cover all those areas

That is a consideration i.e. thin/extend the defenders out. But I wonder it the density of the mines prohibits a board front operation of that sort meaning the UA has to focus on narrow sectors where their key equipment can be concentrated. Unfortunately a bunch of narrow attacks does not equate into a broad front approach. Russia can identify those sectors and concentrate on them or just sit back an wait to see which one is the most serious. 

Edited July 24, 2023 by kevinkin

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, _Morpheus_ said:

IMHO: Longer russians are staying on the occupied positions, better positions they will have. Take a look how much mines/tranches russians prepare in Zaporizhia, so Bakhmut should not have so many minefields around it.

Yes, the best way to destroy Russian military capacities is do so before they have months to dig in and mine everything in front of them.  As long as Ukraine can keep pushing around Bakhmut with existing forces then Russia is going to be more distracted by this than Ukraine.  Ukraine can afford to stop attacking tomorrow if it wishes to, but Russia can not really afford to lose Bakhmut.  The negative PR about such a loss would be risky for the regime.

Steve

[kevinkin]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

but Russia can not really afford to lose Bakhmut.

I think at this point the only PR that matters for Putin is the “us vs the west” narrative and in that model Bakhmut is peanuts. However, we don’t have any way to take the pulse of the Russian people. So perhaps Bakhmut has more symbolic meaning than would be rationally associated with it. Number of Russians involved and killed etc.. Meaning, I could be wrong. Maybe they will re-name the place Putingrad. I guess sometimes the motivations behind specific military operations can only be understood by the participants. 

https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-why-is-bakhmut-so-important-to-russia-and-a-thorn-in-the-side-of-putin-12779619

[A Canadian Cat]

I was going to post these guys have to be journalists first but you covered that.

5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

If Ukraine deliberately targeted these "journalists" then that is theoretically a war crime.  However, if there was a trial the defense would quite understandably ague that these guys weren't journalists.

They don't even have to go that far. Where they travelling in a vehicle marked "PRESS" on all sides? Could anyone on the UA side have believed this was a RA recon unit? I'm going to bet the answers are No and Yes. If so then case never opened because they looked just like a legit target.

Edited July 24, 2023 by IanL
spelling and grammar5

[cesmonkey]

An interesting interview.
One of the things mentioned is that Ukraine has a substantial need for non-lethal aid like communication equipment and portable generators but tells the United States that it only wants lethal aid as they believe that there is a limited amount of funding available from the US and its better to devote that entirely to lethal aid. Non-lethal aid can "usually" be bought commercially off the shelf while the options for buying lethal aid commercially are very limited. However, Ukraine still has big needs for non-lethal aid that are unfulfilled.
 

 

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, danfrodo said:

I'm still wondering what the cost-benefit looks like from UKR perspective for fighting around Bakhmut.  Aint much there worth taking and at this point it doesn't have much morale or propaganda value, IMO. 

According to Mashovets, Bakhmut - Chasiv Yar - Kostianntynivka -Druzhkivka area falling was a neccesary term for Russian offensive on Siversk - Bilohorivka direction  in order to secure the area before general offensive to Sloviansk and Kramatorsk - main cities of Ukraine-controlled Donbas. Russian winter offensive on Vuhledar was a piece of this operation. In case of success, Russians would be advance to Pokrovsk, threatening the southern flank and even rear of Sloviansk-Kramatorsk group. So, Bakhmut as a city itself hadn't enough strategic sense, but in complex all Bakmhut direction was a gate to unocuppied Donbas.     

Edited July 24, 2023 by Haiduk

[Carolus]

1 hour ago, cesmonkey said:

An interesting interview.
One of the things mentioned is that Ukraine has a substantial need for non-lethal aid like communication equipment and portable generators but tells the United States that it only wants lethal aid as they believe that there is a limited amount of funding available from the US and its better to devote that entirely to lethal aid. 

I mean, they are right.

But isn't depressing, seeing how China and to a lesser degree Iran will provide whatever they can just to nut-punch the West while Western nations look with equal concern at Ukraine and their purses.

Granted, this is possible because the third parties supporting Russia are inhumane, bloodthirsty regimes who do not have to worry about accountability for their budgets.

But boy, does it show how much easier it is to just embrace being the villain instead of trying to do what's right. You will be called a villain anyway, often by people who benefited a lot from the Western system. It is a thankless task.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Carolus